Morn woke up as a
Haiku, colored crimson is
Monet, happy painting.
Morn woke up as a
Morn woke up as a
Haiku, colored crimson is
Monet, happy painting.
I was unable to sleep. Had a dream of copulating with my wife for a very long time. Yes the dream was enjoyable as I was able to give my wife many orgasms. Its exam time here and I have started marking English scripts. It’s sheer existential boredom as the scripts were littered with grammatical, punctuation and spelling errors. I corrected a few but grew bored by the process and the rest I just put red-lines underneath. I wonder how I can impart the mastery of my language to kids. The new generation kids are prone to selfies, LOL’s and U’s. But when it comes to plain writing of English they end up being disastrous monsters.
I am thinking of Ahriman, the demon in Zoroastrian religion and Rudolf Steiner’s depiction of him. I have developed a soft corner in my heart for him.
It is the beginning of Onam festival and women have started wearing (SETTU) Sarees, sarees white with gold borders. They look so ravishing in it. While correcting, reading or writing, I tend to smoke a lot of cigarettes. My lover has invited me to her apartment on Sunday and I am very excited. Saw black cat ambling down the school ground. I thought maybe its good luck.
. I carry the 1$ Bill in my purse as talisman. The Masonic inscription of the All Seeing Eye and the Unfinished Pyramid is awesome in symbolic meaning. I am in need of some money about three lakh rupees to pay my employees before the school closes for Onam. May be with Ahriman’s help, I can win a lottery tomorrow. Morning was boring but afternoon soared my spirits with my lover’s message.
Jean Paul Sartre as an idiom means affirmation or negation in one’s existential thought.
When I realized that I was not selected after the interview, I became a Jean Paul Sartre.
When my adulterous lover invited me for a rendezvous I became a Jean Paul Sartre.
Monster Freud awoke in me as an idiom when I had a dream and on waking up I couldn’t remember its contents. Monster Freud as an idiom means failure to remember a dream.
I had a Monster Freud Yesterday.
Most dreams are Monster Freuds for people.
A cracked mirror of
Clouds hung across the moon, an
Art was weeping sad.
Recently I met a conspiracy addict, a die-hard Christian and we discussed many things. I, though knowing, asked him causally about the symbolism of the 1 $ Bill –the all Seeing Eye and the unfinished pyramid which I regard as a great work of art. The emblem is surreal and juxtaposes fiction and reality to a credible tangibility. He abruptly told me it’s demonic and signifies the New World Order. Unlike him, I paid Indian currency and bought a 1 $ Bill which I carry in my purse. I am so mesmerized by its enigma. Again he told me that the Vatican is a Cult and devotion to the idol Virgin Mary is idolatry. I think in a way its true as there’s no Biblical reference to worship Mary. And again Mary was not a Virgin. I am pondering over the question is Catholicism blaspheming Christianity? I don’t know the answer and I do not care. I become amused when people light candles for the idol Mary. Again our thoughts drifted on to the internet. He said WWW is 666, the mark of the beast. Yes, in a way he is true as it represents the Hebrew letter Vav. It is humorous to see what people post on face book. Many souls post their airline ticket, Arrival and departure and Selfies. Facebook is an ego booster to people with low self esteem. For my friend Facebook, WordPress and all social media sites are controlled by the Illuminati. People using Facebook suffer from Egosis a strange disease of the EGO. There are eccentric people who change their profile picture every now and then. Worse are the ones who proclaim sickness and want to get likes and shares. There are some who use Christ and plead: share and like and get your wishes satisfied. My friend believes that this is a plot of the Illuminati to gratify the ego of people. Again my friend said why should a phone be called I—phone? I stands for the Illuminati. He told me that 13 (13 again a strange occult number) families in the World control the Illuminati and want to control the whole world. For him the Bombing of the twin towers was a plan of the Illuminati to start a war in the Middle East and to get a footing of America to dabble in the affairs of the Middle East. The Illuminati’s interest is OIL and Iraq is richly blessed with it. It’s a frank to probe what was wrong with Iraq during the regime of Saddam. Again our conversation drifted on to Robin Williams. My friend claims that he was murdered by the Illuminati. Even the death of Michael Jackson was not normal but an Illuminati sponsored death. I am not sure whether I can believe all of this but I also carry my doubts and I am also addicted to conspiracy. I turn to my purse and smile wickedly at the 1$ bill. For all I can say is that the Illuminati can go to hell. I care two hoots.
I would like to analyze the story based on the literary codes developed by Barthes. They are: the hermeneutic code, Proairetic code, the Semantic Code, the symbolic code and the cultural code. For Barthes, the hermeneutic code represents the enigma of the text. The Proairetic code represents the spatial and temporal dimensions. The Semantic code refers to the level of connotation. The symbolic code represents the binary division of language and the cultural code the conventions of the society.
Looking at the story from a Hermeneutic code, Borges writes about an imaginary writer and a book that does not exist. He creates facts out of fantasy and fantasy out of facts and his whole fictional exploration is a futile phantasmagoria.
He begins the story by quoting a catalogue made by Madame Henri Bachelier on the omissions and additions made to the text of Menard which appeal to Calvinists, Masons and the Circumcised. Is he making a dig at conservatism? Is he being skeptical about tradition? One can never fully interpret due to the very obscurity of his comment. There is an ironic humor inherent in this statement.
Borges again becomes fictional and goes on to enumerate that an examination of the files of Menard is necessary for the exegesis of Quixote. The files are literary and mention the following:
(a) A symbolist sonnet which occurred twice in a review. Everyone is familiar with idea of symbolism and symbolist poets. What one can’t discern is to why Borges makes a random connection to symbolism while trying to explicate Menard’s Don Quixote. Is Borges playing some kind of practical joke with the reader?
(b) A monograph containing the possibility of creating a poetic vocabulary of concepts which would not be synonyms or periphrases of those which make up everyday language. Is Borges hinting at adornment of poetic language? Adornment can take place by clothing words with figures of speech or using neologisms.
(c) A monograph on certain connections and affinities with the Philosophies of Descartes, Leibniz and Wilkins. Is Borges making a big bluff or does he want to impress his readers that he is conversant with the philosophies of the above mentioned philosophers. Why does the author want to show off to an audience?
(d) The work sheets of a monograph on George Boole’s symbolic logic. It is very intriguing that Borges makes this strange connection. How can logic be related to fiction.
(e) An examination of the essential metric laws of French Prose. Borges is conversant in Spanish. I am not sure whether he has the adequate knowledge to comment on French Prose. Meter again is connected to poetry. How can it be equated with prose? Is this a structural flaw in the narrative?
(f) A work in which different solutions are given to the problem of Achilles and the Tortoise. It is really absurd, a canard of the mind. May be Borges is inducing the reader to think that Achilles won the race. Borges has not deconstructed the paradox of Zeno. I wonder why Borges does not suggest an alternative.
(g) A determined analysis of the syntactical customs Toulet. Menard says that censure and praise are sentimental operations which have nothing to do with literary criticism. This statement makes Borges a precursor to literary theorists.
Again Borges digresses and goes on to discuss texts which have inspired Menard to create Quixote. One is a philological fragment which mentions Christ on a boulevard, Hamlet on La Cannebiere and Don Quixote on Wall Street. The depiction of Christ is rather incongruous. What is the mystic connection between Christ and a boulevard? The same goes to Hamlet. Are the Moguls of Wall Street Quixotic?
Again Borges the writer mentions that Menard writes to him that the final term in a theological, metaphysical demonstration –the objective world, God, causality the forms of the universe is common in my framed novel. This demonstrates that Borges is a confused writer. If the world is created by God how it can be objective? Is he mixing up a broth of evolutionary theism?
Again he expostulates that to write Quixote, one must know Spanish well, recover a Catholic faith, fight against the Moors and forget the history of Europe between the years 1602 and 1918. Everyone knows that Quixote by Cervantes was a revolt against Catholicism. The fight between Catholics and the moors is related to History. Is Borges being ironic when he reiterates that we should forget History? 1918 is symbolic for the beginning of the First World War. The narrative of Borges is so fragmented and ambles irrelevantly from one topic to another.
Borges contradicts himself by saying that in a passage of Menard never authored by him there is a sentence: ‘the river nymphs and the dolorous and humid echo.’ This provokes the reader to laugh in delicious delight. Borges is embarking on a flight of fancy. This statement brings into the mind of Borges a quotation of Shakespeare ‘Where a malignant and a turbaned Turk’. Is the monument of literature a sheer extravagant waste? Is it built on the foundations of whimsical chicanery?
Menard in his novel Quixote has no gypsies, no conquistadors and no mystics. Is Borges making an allusion of irony? Again Borges says that in chapter nine of Menard’s Quixote there is a quote: ‘…truth whose mother is History, rival of time, depository of deeds, witness of the past, exemplar and adviser to the present and the future’s counselor. Borges is being philosophical about History. But the fundamental questions are: is History a truth? In postmodernism History is a methodological discourse.